RD4 - Actual and Planned Uses of At-Risk Funds - January 8, 2010


Executive Summary:
Item 140 (C.11.e.3b) of Chapter 781, 2009 Acts of Assembly, requires school divisions to submit certain data to the Department of Education in order to receive funding from the Lottery Proceeds Fund for add-on services related to educationally at-risk students.

The language in Item 140 reads as follows:

11. Remedial Education Payments
a. An additional payment estimated at $69,441,065 the first year and $69,143,636 the second year from the general fund shall be disbursed by the Department of Education to support the Board of Education’s Standards of Quality prevention, intervention, and remediation program adopted in June 2003.

b. The payment shall be calculated based on one hour of additional instruction per day for identified students, using the three year average percent of students eligible for the federal Free Lunch program as a proxy for students needing such services. Fall membership shall be multiplied by the three year average division-level Free Lunch eligibility percentage to determine the estimated number of students eligible for services. Pupil-teacher ratios shall be applied to the estimated number of eligible students to determine the number of instructional positions needed for each school division. The pupil-teacher ratio applied for each school division shall range from 10:1 for those divisions with the most severe combined three year average failure rates for English and math Standards of Learning test scores to 18:1 for those divisions with the lowest combined three year average failure rates for English and math Standards of Learning test scores.

c. Funding shall be matched by the local government based on the composite index of local ability-to-pay.

d. To provide flexibility in the instruction of English Language Learners who have limited English proficiency and who are at risk of not meeting state accountability standards, school divisions may use state and local funds from the SOQ Prevention, Intervention, and Remediation account to employ additional English Language Learner teachers to provide instruction to identified limited English proficiency students. Using these funds in this manner is intended to supplement the instructional services provided through the SOQ staffing standard of 17 instructional positions per 1,000 limited English proficiency students. School divisions using the SOQ Prevention, Intervention, and Remediation funds in this manner shall only employ instructional personnel licensed by the Board of Education.

e. An additional state payment estimated at $66,800,404 the first year and $60,942,727 the second year from the Lottery Proceeds Fund shall be disbursed based on the estimated number of federal Free Lunch participants, in support of programs for students who are educationally at risk. The additional payment shall be based on the state share of:

1) A minimum one percent add-on, as a percent of the per pupil basic aid cost, for each child who qualifies for the federal Free Lunch Program; and

2) An addition to the add-on, based on the concentration of children qualifying for the federal Free Lunch Program. Based on its percentage of Free Lunch participants, each school division will receive between 1 and 12 percent in additional basic aid per Free Lunch participant. These funds shall be matched by the local government, based on the composite index of local ability-to-pay.

3a) Local school divisions are required to spend the established at-risk payment (state and local share) on approved programs for students who are educationally at risk.

b) To receive these funds, each school division shall certify to the Department of Education that the state and local shares of the at-risk payment will be used to support approved programs for students who are educationally at risk and shall submit, in a format specified by the Department of Education, the school division's comprehensive strategy for intervention, prevention, and remediation, including the number of students served and review of available data. These programs may include: Dropout Prevention, community and school-based truancy officer programs, Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID), Project Discovery, Reading Recovery, programs for students who speak English as a second language, or programs related to increasing the success of disadvantaged students in completing a high school degree and providing opportunities to encourage further education and training. Further, any new funds a school division receives in excess of the amounts received in fiscal year 2008 may be used first to provide data coordinators or to purchase similar services for schools that have not met Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) under the federal No Child Left Behind Act or are not fully accredited under the Standards of Accreditation. The data coordinator position is intended to provide schools with needed support in the area of data analysis and interpretation for instructional purposes, as well as overall data management and the administration of state assessments. The position would primarily focus on data related to instruction and school improvement, including: student assessment, student attendance, student/teacher engagement, behavior referrals, suspensions, retention, and graduation rates.

In July of 2009, the Superintendent of Public Instruction distributed a superintendent’s memorandum that included a survey instrument to be completed by school divisions to collect the data required by the Appropriation Act. This memo is located at http://www.doe.virginia.gov/info_centers/administrators/superintendents_memos/2009/189-09.shtml. As of the date of this report, 125 school divisions out of 132 have responded to the survey. The divisions that have not submitted are as follows: Colonial Heights, Henry County, King and Queen County, Lynchburg City, Norfolk City, Richmond City, and Roanoke City. Consequently, these divisions are not included in the data presented in this report.

The survey instrument administered to school divisions included a list of potential uses of at-risk funds as well as the inclusion of an additional category to capture and describe any uses that were not part of the list provided. This report summarizes the data submitted by school divisions and provides detailed information on the uses of funds by all reporting school divisions.